A HISTORY OF NORFOLK 



east bank of that little stream and close to the water's edge. In shape 

 it is roughly rectangular, longer from east to west than from north to 

 south : its western side curves slightly outwards to the river (fig. 3). 

 Round the enclosure stand, on the north and west, the striking ruins of 

 ancient and massive walls (fig. 4), and on the east and south huge 

 earthen mounds concealing walls beneath them, while outside, except 

 along the river face, a great fosse or ditch can still be traced. The size 

 of the place has been variously estimated, and indeed the earthen mounds 

 hinder exact calculations, but the true internal measurements probably 

 approximate to 1,400 feet from east to west and 1,100 from north to 

 south, and the internal area seems to be about 34 acres.^ Four entrances 

 can be observed, one in each side, but their antiquity needs to be confirmed 

 by excavation. The walls consist of a concrete core, bonding-tiles and 

 a flint facing, and in general resemble most of the Roman walls of towns 

 and forts which still exist in our southern and south-eastern counties. 

 They were strengthened externally by round projecting towers, such as 

 were often used in the fourth century. One of these towers can still be 

 traced close to the entrance on the west or river face : another, on the 

 north face, was seen by Mr. Arderon, but is no longer visible above 

 the surface. Both towers are said by the writer just named to have 

 been constructed, like the walls, of concrete and bonding-tiles but to 

 have been faced with bricks cut in squares instead of flints.^ In addition 

 to the external towers, the walls appear to have had a ramp of earth 

 behind them, but the exact relation between wall and ramp is not clear. 

 Thus, it has been suggested that Caister was originally defended only by 

 earthen ramparts and that walls were subsequently added in such a way 

 that the outer face of the defences was new perpendicular masonry and 

 the inner face the earlier earthen rampart. It may, perhaps, be simpler 

 to suppose, in default of excavation, that here, as elsewhere, the ramp 

 was erected for the sake of the wall.' 



The enclosure of 34 acres within these walls is now one wide 

 enclosure of agricultural land, save that a medieval church stands near 

 one corner, as at Porchester and Silchester. No recorded excavations 

 have ever been made here, and we are totally ignorant as to the build- 

 ings which presumably covered the ground in Roman times. We may 

 be sure that the church does not represent a Romano-British sacellum^ 

 as some rash writers have supposed, but we have no definite feature 



' So the Ordnance Surveys and Wilkins in Archceologia, xii. 137. William Arderon, in Philosophical 

 Transactions, xlvi. (No. 493) p. 200, gives the internal measurement as 1,176 by 792 feet, the internal 

 area as 21 acres, and the total area including mounds and fosse as iz\ acres. Edward King (Munimenta 

 Antiqua, ii. 49) and Gough {JJditions to Camden) follow him, but he is certainly wrong. I incline to 

 think that he had figures for the internal area and for the space occupied by the mounds and fosse, and 

 that he then, by some confusion, treated the internal area as if it included the mounds and fosse, and 

 subtracted the figures for these latter when he should have added ; but the matter is not very clear nor, 

 fortunately, very important. 



* Mr. Fitch (see next note) says the facing is flint. He adds that the circumference of the western 

 tower was originally 31 feet. 



* For descriptions of the site and walls, see W. Arderon (cited in the last note) ; Gough's Add. to 

 Camden, ii. 188 ; Wilkins, Archieolo^a, xii. 137 ; Gentleman's Magazine (1807), ii. 913 ; Edward King, 

 Munimenta Antiqua, ii. 49 ; R. Fitch, Journal of the British Archceohgical Association, xiv. 1 24. The 

 annexed plan is adapted from the Ordnance Survey. 



290 



